Today the climate crisis is an urgent issue considered an "existential threat" to human survival. Especially since COP21, the role of regions and cities has drawn attention to address the crisis, and the international society has encouraged local-scal...
Today the climate crisis is an urgent issue considered an "existential threat" to human survival. Especially since COP21, the role of regions and cities has drawn attention to address the crisis, and the international society has encouraged local-scale efforts. Cities are not only responsible for the more significant part of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but also as centres of wealth and innovations have resources and means that are required to tackle climate crisis. In this era economically intertwined around the world, cities, as major consumption nodes, cannot neglect their consumption-based (CB) GHG emissions, i.e., carbon footprints (CF), while most cities currently target reducing production-based (PB) GHG emissions, and considerable literature has suggested circular economy (CE) as an appealing way to reduce urban CF. At the same time, more research about the assessment of CE’s effects on reducing urban CF has been looked-for. With this consideration, this study aims to examine a city’s CB GHG emissions, quantitatively analyse the effect of the CE strategy, and suggest policy implications to further enhance the effectiveness of urban climate change mitigation.
The current study selects Seoul as a study area to give an insight into city-level carbon footprint and CE’s reduction potential. The Seoul Metropolitan Government is seeking GHG emissions reduction based on the GHG accounting method that evaluates only direct emissions and partial indirect emissions. However, as a substantial consumption-oriented metropolis having the smallest GHG emissions portion of the industry sector among provincial-level regions, Seoul is an area that needs to comprehensively examine the effects of consumption in its climate change mitigation. The temporal scope of this study is set as 2015 according to the base year of the latest Korean inter-regional input-output table, which is the main data used in this study.
The Environmentally Extended Multi-Regional Input-Output Analysis (EE-MRIOA), which is progressively employed by broad research on CB accounting of environmental pressure, is utilised for mathematical modelling and analysis. The three scenarios - BAU, CAP2050, and CE - are designed and applied to the model to analyse the amount of GHG emissions from geographically distributed regions that can be expected to be reduced when applying CE strategies in Seoul.
The result shows that to satisfy the needs of Seoul, more than three times the official statistics were generated around the world in 2015. Especially, as it is quite common that a city’s CB GHG emissions surpass its PB GHG emissions, the CB GHG emissions in Seoul is 5.07 times larger than those of the PB approach, where the ratio is the greatest among those resulting from similar literature. The hotspots – housing (and infrastructure), nutrition, and mobility - which comprise about 90% of Seoul's carbon footprints are seen, and how much Seoul depend on the regions outside of the city for their needs are identified by product and societal need. Especially, it is uncovered that the current accounting approach and climate mitigation policy of Seoul has a significant limit of neglecting the CB emissions of the material resources such as steel and cement and the nutrition sector, which accounts for 9.15% of the total CF.
In the scenario analysis comparing three scenarios, namely, BAU, CAP2050, and CE, the effects of six strategies in the CE scenario are quantitatively assessed. The CE strategies included in the CE scenario are focused on narrowing the resource flow, including lessening the carbon intensity of the commodities and production process and reducing the required materials. The results show that the CE scenario encompassing consumption drawdown and efficiency improvement of material resources and energy has significant CF reduction effects in Seoul, reducing 20% of the baseline emissions. In the relevant field, this study is novel in that it attempts to assess the city-level comprehensive effects of CE by interpreting CE strategies as social practices encompassing production and consumption and linking it with societal needs, besides providing the first calculation of the CB GHG emissions of Seoul.
In conclusion, Seoul has significantly more CB GHG emissions than PB ones and official statistics. Even though it is hard to deny that Seoul has responsibility for "physically producing" goods and services to meet its needs, it lacks the climate mitigation policies related to material resources such as cement, steel, and fossil fuels owing to its service-oriented industrial structure and the current GHG emissions accounting method that does not comprehensively calculate the indirect emissions derived from consumption. Furthermore, nutrition (food) is not considered a policy sector at all. To reduce its CB GHG emissions, the CE strategies encompassing both sides of production and consumption, such as increasing material efficiency (e.g., shared mobility), decreasing the intermediate input (e.g., localisation of services and food production) or final demand for material resources (e.g., teleworking,), and replacing the conventional inputs and final demands with less carbon-intensive products (e.g., building with more bricks and woods, vegetarian diet) or renewable resources (e.g., organic food production). While the city can prioritise appropriate CE strategies depending on which sectors or products it consumes or produces a lot, picking only some of them will not suffice. Still, more diverse and/or aggressive, overall CE strategies than those used in the CE scenario proposed in this study are necessitated to respond properly to the climate crisis.